What CZ 75 internals would you chose to work with?

[Metal Wonder Nine Guy]

If you had to pick one or the other with what you know now, would you rather work on the CZ-75 decocker or safety frame internals? I know the decocker can be a pain with that decocker cage part. But as my buddy says, once you work with both internals it becomes much easier to work with either version.

[tdogg]

Honestly either platform is acceptable and your decision should be based on what type of action you want and not how to difficult the internals are to work with. 

I started out reworking decockers because that is what I owned.  I've become comfortable working with safety models now as well having owned a couple of variants.  There isn't much difference between the two in terms of ease of stripping down and polishing.  Everyone seems to complain about the decocker cage and putting the parts in it but reality you only have to do that once and then when you strip it down you just need a slave pin to pull the cage out.  The safety variants need to have the sear safety leg fitted if you change hammers.  Sure you can purchase the adjustable sear to aid in that but then you have to dial in the sear setscrew and hope it gets Loctite'd properly.  What I'm trying to say is they both have plus and minus's but in general they are nearly identical to work on.

Honestly if I were running CZ, I'd build a Decocker Shadow 2 Orange with an optic variant (call it the Shadow 2 Tactical?).  It would be a dedicated USPSA Production/Carry Optics gun.  It would get the benefit of a short reset without the firing pin block and also have the advantage of being able to decock at the "Make Ready" command.  I'm not sure why the Shadow 2 variant didn't come built like this in the first place?

Cheers,
Toby

[retteryer]

Of course safety, it is much easier to work on ,why make life harder.

[no.vale.la.pena]

You could look at the Omega trigger models if you are unsure of which to commit to, I had a Cajunized P01 Omega's that a had fantastic and now I believe CGW has even more options for the Omega series (it was ~6ish years ago that I had that P01 cajunized). I never worked on the P01 Omega myself but I found the pro package install on three safety SP01's plus a safety P01 very manageable for a novice like myself. 

A real game changer for me has been grabbing the Eeman tech trigger return spring and sear spring tools. They are a bit pricey for what they are but they are 100% worth it on the frustration saving side.  For me, trigger return spring tool is a must if you plan on working on your CZs yourself or if you just shoot higher volumes as the TRS will eventually need replacement.  It makes changing the trigger spring or the trigger in general very manageable and quick. 

[Lock-n-load]

Honestly either platform is acceptable and your decision should be based on what type of action you want and not how to difficult the internals are to work with. 

I started out reworking decockers because that is what I owned.  I've become comfortable working with safety models now as well having owned a couple of variants.  There isn't much difference between the two in terms of ease of stripping down and polishing.  Everyone seems to complain about the decocker cage and putting the parts in it but reality you only have to do that once and then when you strip it down you just need a slave pin to pull the cage out.  The safety variants need to have the sear safety leg fitted if you change hammers.  Sure you can purchase the adjustable sear to aid in that but then you have to dial in the sear setscrew and hope it gets Loctite'd properly.  What I'm trying to say is they both have plus and minus's but in general they are nearly identical to work on.

I started on decocker too spo1tatical and p01 ,fullcajun packages ..then shadows and shadow 2’s
The learning curve is higher with a decocker but after mastering a few of those a safety version is a piece of cake.shadows even easier..but with a lot of polishing and Cajun gunworks parts my sp01 tatical and shadow have very similar triggers .
Honestly if I were running CZ, I'd build a Decocker Shadow 2 Orange with an optic variant (call it the Shadow 2 Tactical?).  It would be a dedicated USPSA Production/Carry Optics gun.  It would get the benefit of a short reset without the firing pin block and also have the advantage of being able to decock at the "Make Ready" command.  I'm not sure why the Shadow 2 variant didn't come built like this in the first place?

Cheers,
Toby

[M1A4ME]

I don't have any decocker CZs so I guess that means I've chosen the safety models.

I think I've had all those apart at one point or another.

The Omegas seem easier to take apart and polish around on but I do wonder about the roller that can affect function/trigger pull.  It adds, in my mind, an extra bit of complexity/adjustment over the older B model design.

[no.vale.la.pena]

The Omegas seem easier to take apart and polish around on but I do wonder about the roller that can affect function/trigger pull.  It adds, in my mind, an extra bit of complexity/adjustment over the older B model design.

I would agree there. For me, I moved away from the Omega models because I started carrying + competing with the safety only models and I really preferred the ability to add a CGW extra strength safety detent spring and have a much more positive safety engagement/disengagement. Plus I have really been enjoying the CGW pro package + CZC flat DA/SA trigger combo in my SP01s + P01.